viven44 Posted Sunday at 12:09 PM Author Share Posted Sunday at 12:09 PM You did really well, Vivek! It has to be that 3.07 axle ratio. And, but the way, here's a snippet from the 1984 Light Truck Data Book showing that axle as standard with a 460 2WD SRW. Thanks Gary! That explains that it was clearly a common option ... purpose... maybe have the 1 ton to have the payload capacity to haul a cab-over camper (?) or payload long distance. The towing capacity is only about 7000 lbs but the truck tows really well. The previous owner towed his restoration car project on UHAUL trailer from Washington and while in Texas a massive trailer with chemical tanks many times (he hauled chemicals)... I had half a mind to bring the Bronco on a trailer... but UHAUL transportation calculator said it was out of this trucks league ... it would allow a small car but not a Bronco... it didn't even ask what rear end ratio I had, but somehow knew I couldn't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Lewis Posted Sunday at 12:38 PM Share Posted Sunday at 12:38 PM Thanks Gary! That explains that it was clearly a common option ... purpose... maybe have the 1 ton to have the payload capacity to haul a cab-over camper (?) or payload long distance. The towing capacity is only about 7000 lbs but the truck tows really well. The previous owner towed his restoration car project on UHAUL trailer from Washington and while in Texas a massive trailer with chemical tanks many times (he hauled chemicals)... I had half a mind to bring the Bronco on a trailer... but UHAUL transportation calculator said it was out of this trucks league ... it would allow a small car but not a Bronco... it didn't even ask what rear end ratio I had, but somehow knew I couldn't Can't believe U-Haul knows what the axle ratio is, so can't understand their position. But it should handle a Bronco well if you have brakes on the trailer. As we discussed yesterday, the 3.07 axle ratio will cause more slippage in the torque converter than 4.10's would. But to clarify, it takes X amount of torque to push the truck down the highway. The rear axle gears multiply the torque so 4.10 gears require about 1/3 less torque through the transmission, which means less slippage in the TC. So the 3.07 gears are going cause more slippage and, therefore, generate more heat. As Jim says, the C6 excels at turning energy into heat. But if you have a large enough transmission cooler you can get by towing with those gears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArdWrknTrk Posted Sunday at 01:05 PM Share Posted Sunday at 01:05 PM You did really well, Vivek! It has to be that 3.07 axle ratio. And, but the way, here's a snippet from the 1984 Light Truck Data Book showing that axle as standard with a 460 2WD SRW. I'm surprised at the D70, and that there's no option for 3.73:1 I would definitely like that as a ratio in my truck but I'm not about to change TWO axles to get there.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
viven44 Posted Sunday at 02:25 PM Author Share Posted Sunday at 02:25 PM I'm surprised at the D70, and that there's no option for 3.73:1 I would definitely like that as a ratio in my truck but I'm not about to change TWO axles to get there.. The 3.07 w/460 is no slouch either from a full-stop (largely due to my transmission probably). kramttocs can attest to that probably when we went on our joyride in the afternoon. The C6 I have shifts normally from 1-2 at about 25 mph and then 2-3 at about 40mph. If I press the throttle hard, 1-2 shifts happen at about 40mph and 2-3 is closer to 55-60mph... Gary had mentioned this shifting characteristic may also be a feature of the 3.07 rear end... I didn't drive my 84 F150 much before I sold it but I don't know if it did the same. I have a strong feeling the transmission on BB 2WD has been rebuilt with a shift kit that is geared towards towing... the downshifts are also rather aggressive. I am down in the 1st gear anytime I slow down below 20mph and initially it was a bit annoying and I contemplated tuning the shifts to lower... but I probably won't. For pure city driving, I would any day go for a 3.55 or 4.11... Big Red was super fun in the city with the 4.11/T19... the 3.07... gunning is essential to pass Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
viven44 Posted Sunday at 02:36 PM Author Share Posted Sunday at 02:36 PM Can't believe U-Haul knows what the axle ratio is, so can't understand their position. But it should handle a Bronco well if you have brakes on the trailer. As we discussed yesterday, the 3.07 axle ratio will cause more slippage in the torque converter than 4.10's would. But to clarify, it takes X amount of torque to push the truck down the highway. The rear axle gears multiply the torque so 4.10 gears require about 1/3 less torque through the transmission, which means less slippage in the TC. So the 3.07 gears are going cause more slippage and, therefore, generate more heat. As Jim says, the C6 excels at turning energy into heat. But if you have a large enough transmission cooler you can get by towing with those gears. That makes sense Gary. That is why if/when I buy a new F250 or F350 with the 445 CI gas (aka 7.3L Godzilla) I would go with the 4.3 gear option. (Probably not until I'm ready to use it for its intended purpose) The 10-speed transmission is there so it should not hurt too much on the highway. The dealers don't understand why I need a 4.3. They tell me ... look both options (3.73 and 4.3) can tow more than 15,000 lbs and when are you ever going to tow over 15,000 lbs and everytime I tell them. Yes they both can but whatever it is that I am towing..... the 4.3 can do it easier (resulting in reduced effort and longevity of drivetrain)... I don't want to buy a diesel and I'm going to go with the best gas configuration Well now, I will take your salient points as well with me on the torque converter slippage vs rear end ratio. They will think I'm very knowledgeable... sorry I will borrow this one and probably won't remember to credit you Here is a pic of BB 2WD from a few years ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts